[crazy_diamond]

I think the kids will be around for the photo ops, yes.

, we'll find out tonight..

[Det.Logan]

I think the kids will be around for the photo ops, yes.

I don't know, I can see Alicia asking, it would seem more consistent with their new open relationship. And I believe Peter needs Alicia, she has been betrayed, if she can give him a chance, so can the voters.

I still don't understand why I'd want to see politicians with their spouses and kids to know if I want to vote for them but for some reason it's become standard!

They say a marriage brings stability, better if with kids. And I can agree. Of course this is an average talk. But it's true also for CEOs.
_________

[Gelfling]

They say a marriage brings stability, better if with kids. And I can agree.

Yeah but in most cases (and I'm not talking about Peter here), those politicians type spend their time campaigning and working and they see their kids and family only during the photo-ops, so since almost everyone knows that having a smiling family when you're in pictures together doesn't make you a better man for any job, why do they keep up with the charade?

[tvdramafan]

Agree with all here re the family stuff. More to the point, statistically when you look at how many non nuclear families there are now ( single parents, gay families etc) you really wonder why this has remained such a holdover.

[Kalinda Smith]

More to the point, statistically when you look at how many non nuclear families there are now ( single parents, gay families etc) you really wonder why this has remained such a holdover.

True. It's just one those remains of the patriarchal system we live in that tells us that we need a Dad to watch over us because Father knows best.

[crazy_diamond]

Hope we get some scenes of them in the finale..

[4Florrick]

Originally Posted by Gelfling (View Post) so since almost everyone knows that having a smiling family when you're in pictures together doesn't make you a better man for any job, why do they keep up with the charade?

Maybe you're giving 'almost everyone' too much credit. Many people are content to buy and swallow what they're spoon-fed by the media.

[Det.Logan]

Originally Posted by 4Florrick (View Post) Maybe you're giving 'almost everyone' too much credit. Many people are content to buy and swallow what they're spoon-fed by the media.

Retriving information is a task not for the lazy. Most of the time this comes from TV or newspapers, even those people who belong to those different type of "families" sometimes prefer to just go along with the stream. It's a long process and most of the time society is ahead of their own choice.

My theory about stability is valid for any kind of family, of course i'm talking about stable and true relationship.

[Gelfling]

Maybe you're giving 'almost everyone' too much credit. Many people are content to buy and swallow what they're spoon-fed by the media.

Sadly you're right. I sometimes surprise myself with my endless hope that my fellow human beings actually use their brains more than twice a week

Retriving information is a task not for the lazy. Most of the time this comes from TV or newspapers, even those people who belong to those different type of "families" sometimes prefer to just go along with the stream.

Getting the info is not the problem. It's analyzing it. You can get your news from traditional media and still question it. 4Florrick is right, the problem isn't the source but the willingness of the recipients to accept whatever conclusion is forced on them by those media.

My theory about stability is valid for any kind of family, of course i'm talking about stable and true relationship.

But what about people who are not the family type? Can't they be trusted as well? Shouldn't they be allowed to run for office and get elected until they actually have a ring or at least someone to pose for the pictures?

[Det.Logan]

Originally Posted by Gelfling (View Post) Getting the info is not the problem. It's analyzing it. You can get your news from traditional media and still question it. 4Florrick is right, the problem isn't the source but the willingness of the recipients to accept whatever conclusion is forced on them by those media.

You need different sources and the ability to put them together. It takes time to find reliable sources, to trust them, to verify the information. Simply, they don't want to do it, so let's take what thay give me.

And some sources ARE the problems. In Italy we have more than one newspapers in the hands of our prime minister... and those magazines are the megaphones of his government

[Gelfling]

I see what you mean! I have trouble understanding how anyone can even watch FOX News anymore with their ludicrous biased coverage of anything Obama and not laugh out loud!

[Kiki17]

Cable news sucks!!!

Fox news is bad and biased but it cannot be over looked how biased MSNBC is too, being pro-Obama. I honestly sometimes do not know what to watch. I rather read.

[Gelfling]

In politics news, they are all biased anyway. What I like about FOX News (and of course I mean that in a comedy sort of way) is that their conservative slant is visible in anything they report and they are not afraid to look like complete fools like when they reported about the latest Miss USA pageant and plainly stated that Miss Oklahoma had been discriminated against by "liberal judges" who preferred the novelty of a muslim Miss USA to a good ole girl from the South who more or less stated that Arizona was right in making anyone who wasn't white a suspect de facto.

I read the news too. TV is too spectacular anyway. I prefer to get as many various sources as possible for the facts and get my opinion on my own.

[Kiki17]

Originally Posted by Gelfling (View Post) I prefer to get as many various sources as possible for the facts and get my opinion on my own.

Exactly

[Det.Logan]

So, showdown time?